Openspace Announcement Discussion with Jack Linden

Can anyone answer this question?
With this price hike, are they going to allow OS owners /renters to do what they want on the land they have purchased? Or is it still going to be under restriction??

IMO, if they raise the price, they need to lift the restrictions. PERIOD.
The feedback I am hearing In World tho, is that they are raising prices and keeping limits enforced! Which, like most others in the posts ive read, supports the thought and feeling this is all about money, and not about "abuse" or getting better servers.

If the "abuse" was dealt with, there would be no need for new upgrades to software and such, therefore no need for a price hike.. right? So it they cant handle the workload of actually checking on each OS and dealing with each owner, then a SMALLER price increase would be more acceptable and at the same time, leave US to continue creating the world that YOU, LL, are collecting so much money on, WITHOUT restrictions!

Thanks in advance to anyone that has an answer to my question. Sorry i got off on a rant there!

*DING DING DING*

LADIES AND GENTLEMAN WE HAVE A WINNER!!!!!

Congratulations, you win the booby prize for being the very *FIRST* person who would *LOVE* to hear my opinion, although I admit, I am not an expert.

I'm talkin 'bout a revolution.... ya know....we all wanna change the world....

Here goes:

Here is the bottom line (as I see it) and it applies to everyone, myself included:

LL is a business.
They are here, they EXIST, to get YOUR money. That is what they want. Your money.

In case I have not been clear: Linden Lab wants your money.

They are not your friend, they are not here to bring happiness by providing a space for people to socialize, build, or run in-world business, they are here to get YOUR MONEY.

They have made a lot of people unhappy with the change to openspaces. they have been making people unhappy with their changes for the nearly 3 years I have been in SL.

Their customer service leaves a lot to be desired.

But think about this: The more people that experience the paradigm shift, to stop thinking that LL is here to somehow HELP them earn money, or HELP them in some other way, the better off the SL experience will be. Because LL will have to adapt as well to all these people who see them as an adversary rather than a friendly entity. LL has made it very easy to have a free account. But yet people continue to keep paying for a service and then cause an outcry when they do not get what they expected.

People claim they have a business or have been doing work and LL has now undone their business or their work. One reason why I do not feel as much of the impact of the change is because I have already experienced the paradigm shift and realized that I do not work for LL, I pay LL to work for me. And when they do not do what I like, they do not get to have my money and I tell them in ways that matter and that they understand, such as cashing out.

If you claim to be a serious businessperson in SL, you should already know this. But if you didn't, you're welcome. I think a lot of people who claim to be running serious businesseses continue to be surprised when LL pulls such stunts as devaluing estate land by 66% and increasing tier by 66%. The truth of the matter is, if you are a serious businessperson in SL, you are ready for the changes.

I may express my displeasure to LL directly or indirectly as well, but the only thing they really understand, is when YOU take YOUR money AWAY from them.

The only thing that is going to cause a change is if LL's userbase holds them accountable. And not by posting nasty messages in the forums. The last time too many nasty messages were posted in the forums, the Lab just did away with the messages by doing away with the forums.

So find a way to stop LL from pulling this crap on its users. According to LL's statistics, there are over 15 million of us. So why can't 15 million people find a way to outsmart the relatively few that make up LL? Even if 1/2 the 15 million are bots, that is still 7.5 million people.


Linden Lab isn't a government, but there are those that allow themselves to be governed by every little change LL makes. Allowing LL to affect your in-world experience is one thing. Allowing LL to affect your out-of-world RL experience is quite another. Fool me once LL, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

I know my opinions are not popular. I don't spew the party line that LL is our friend and if we cry they will help us and change their minds about their policy decisions that line their pockets. But just because something is unpopular, does not mean it is wrong.

The truth isn't often popular.

But the truth is the truth. Although this change sucks for a lot of users, it is going to help improve the economy of Sl in the long run. IF YOU HOLD LL ACCOUNTABLE.

But only if people truly hold LL accountable. As in *accountable with money*. Not as in *accountable by forum flaming and Linden flaming*.

Maybe I am having too much faith in my fellow SL-ers, and the last 3 days have not made me feel more hopeful that people will actually do the *right* thing.

People here in the forums seem to be looking to kick the dog instead of create something better, and if that's what they choose to do, then they deserve to be treated as bad as LL wants to treat them.

(The word is schadenfreude, for some of my accusers. Look it up if you don't know what it means)

Yes, I probably am being unrealistic by thinking that the population will actually do something about this by holding LL accountable. At this point I am nearly ready to revise my original thinking on the subject and say, well, OK, this doesn't matter in the long run because no one is going to do anything about it. It would be much easier for me to just go along with the flow than to spend time being attacked here in the forums for being idealistic and believing that people will actually stand up for themselves and do something other than silly in-world sim crashes and protests and forum flaming. People tend to groupthink and attack easy targets because it makes them feel better. As in: "Oh look, you attacked Snowflake. 10 points for you, Oh wait, just 1 point because she makes herself an easy target by not going along with the group this time".

As I posted earlier, when LL devalued the full estates, I had enough money saved to buy 2 estates. The devaluation made me able to buy 3 estates, but I chose not to. On top of that, LL took an OS sim from me and initially REFUSED a refund on it, for something they took. I did not get my refund on the OS until I CASHED OUT what I was saving to buy extra sims. Cashing out, taking money AWAY, gets you noticed. I stopped trying to increase my business after march of 2008, so I don't have a lot to cash out again, but I have cashed out what little I can after this latest debacle as well.

I believe that we as residents can truly build something stronger and make LL work with us instead of against us, but we need to find a way to circumvent Linden labs "best efforts" to stop us. (Despite our best efforts, something has gone wrong...)

So there you go, my opinion, freely asked for and freely given.

To everyone who didn't ask for it: If you don't like it, as always IGNORE IT. If you choose to flame me for my opinion, that diminishes you and not me. And if you address me directly or quote me, expect to be addressed back, and not necessarily in a manner you like.

You don't need to be premium to own a private region - only for owning land on mainland.

I am not surprised with the various comments and complaints with regard to open spaces. I know from my experience that the lag that is complained about consistently really has more to do with a combination of rendering costs and a lack of understanding on traffic on full scale sims. Do I believe that pricing many users out of open spaces will reduce lag? No I am not so naive to believe that, I have owned main land and the lag there was what pushed me into an open space sim where I never have lag.

Back when the open spaces doubled the prim count, did no one consider that users would use those prims? To be honest, this smells to closely to a bait and switch and goal to maximize profitablility in an area that is lagging. At a time when there are so many cost increases doing a forced "price adjustment" will create ill will.

Ultimately I can offer many suggestions to bridge the gap, as a project manager, there are many creative solutions that may serve both the population and Linden Labs. My hope is that LL takes a very serious look at the situation they are creating and actually in a true first, creates a committee of committed users who are not affiliated with LL to work out not only an effective dialog but brainstorm on creative solutions that really will serve the group of clients that will be very adversly affected by this change in fees. With this suggestion in mind, I happy would participate in this group should it be created.

Best regards,
KL

There were posts here that quoted the original text (see, e.g., /354/1d/289652/27.html#post2194399* and /354/1d/289652/34.html#post2194752*). I suppose, in theory, somebody could have gone in and done surgery on each of those posts, too, but I really doubt it. (Someone may also know of a third-party site that stores full-text of Linden blog posts; I checked the SLU blogbot, but it only grabs a few lines and links back to the original.)

I don't see any difference.

The original blog post really doesn't use the "abuse" word, except in one simile: "as with abuse of region resources, a heavily overloaded Openspace can adversely affect other Openspaces sharing the same machine...." Note the "as with" construction. I take this to compare the effects of heavy OpenSpace use with resource contention that happens on shared-use sims (most notoriously, the Mainland).

But the "abuse" word appears many times in this thread. Why? Because those who are really using OpenSpaces according to their original "ultralight" intent (four-at-a-time, attached, half the prims) got caught-up in the new policy with the same price hike as those who are renting out residential space and really using the expanded capabilities introduced when the OpenSpace product was enhanced and made so popular.

The underlying problem is that *both* these usage models (at least) are in demand. I suppose if there had never been an "ultralight" version, a single product would address enough of the combined demand to be viable, but now history pits one group of customers against another. And I think that's where the allegations of "abuse" arose.

________
*Post count identifiers and links could become inaccurate if preceding posts are deleted, resulting in subsequent posts getting renumbered. I hope the new blog/forums software will have some working permalink capability.

In the three days following the LL openspaces announcement OpenLife got 3500 new registrations. They doubled their login servers but still have problems accomodating the exodus of SL people to OpenLife. See http://openlifegrid.com/Main/Blogs/tabid/61/EntryID/198/Default.aspx.

They sell a private island 256x256m sim for $145 w a monthly tier of $75. This comes with 45000 prims -- this is total prims including pool for avatar prims so is not comparable to sl prims of 15000 -- I believe sl reserves at least another 15000 prims for avatars.

In addition u can buy 256x256m water sims surrounding your private island sim at $10 per month. These sims can be either water or archipelago but can't be used to build on or even terraform after initial setup.

OpenLife is still very primitive - they are just about ready to introduce their currency so today are relying on freebies for clothes etc. Also only about 2/3 of the LSL script language has so far been implemented so chances are existing SL scripts won't run without rewrite. Full perm items can be transferred from SL to OpenLife using the Second Inventory software product available on SL Exchange.

Hmmm... now that Linden raise the tier for openspace to compensate for the performance issue, I wonder if people are free to max out the resources given the fact that they would have already paid extra for the extra performance?

Would Linden remove the "light use" clause from the terms of condition use now?

Shouldn't now the usage limit of openspace be exactly the same as the regular full sim if Linden got what the extra tier to pay for the extra asset server load?

Otherwise, if openspace is still limited to "light use" and still be restricted, what does the extra tier pay for then?

If it doesn't pay for any extra performance, then stop bullshitting raising the extra tier to compensate for the performance issue.

Be fair!

There's an interesting technical question here, and it would be nice if we had enough information to really know the answer: If OpenSpaces actually had enough resource controls in place to prevent any adverse impact on other sims sharing the core or the server, and on backend services and networks, then one could build up to the limit on prims, etc., without any fuzzy usage policy guidelines--just as one can with full-primmed Estate sims. But if that were the case, would there be enough capacity remaining to be useful for anything? Could it even support the old, low-prim "scenic" void sim use?

It's far from clear to me how much capacity would be available with such a model. The answer would seem to depend on two factors: how much overhead would be incurred by establishing those resource controls, and how much the current model leverages timesharing of resource demand across sims.

OK, I read all of that and I still dont see what your idea is to fight LL, all you said was , if you dont like it, leave, take your money away.
That is not fighting LL, that is running away.

If you have an idea, please share it, I really DO want to fight this.

Well since everyone else has posted something, I guess I have just one thing to say. As a sim developer, I have had a nightmare of a time telling people who propose development to me that I will not work in open space sims, because of the performance issues involved. And almost 100% of these people are shocked and dumbfounded when I throw them the proper wiki pages regarding the use of openspace. If you want to blame somebody, blame the real estate agents who flooded the grid with developed open spaces and never told anyone that they were used against the TOS. Because that is the bottom line here.

I am sorry? where did it say it was against the TOS??

What it actually said was
QUOTE from the information page.

It is therefore important to understand what these regions are. They are provided for light use only, not for building, living in, renting as homes or use for events. As a stretch of open water for boating or a scenic wooded area they are fine, but we do not advise more serious use than this and will not respond to performance issues reported should you not use them in this way.

Please note the last line of this.

but we do not advise more serious use than this and will not respond to performance issues reported should you not use them in this way.

So are you trying to prove my point about nobody knowing how to use an openspace or is this a serious question? I just can't tell. I mean really, dig into the SL wiki pages. I am not playing the ingorance is bliss card here. The forums, and wiki pages are riddled with tonnes of pages about the use and implementation of the OS sims. I don't think I have to point you in any direction to find them.

The bottom line is that this is paid bandwidth. In any other circumstance you pay for your bandwidth. And if you go over a hosting company will charge you. Period, end of story. In an ideal world it would be great if companies cared about sob stories and people's feelings, but they just don't. Just be happy that the Lindens didn't surcharge people a tonne of fees for going over their agreed bandwidth. Has anyone thought of that. That for months the Lindens have been footing your bill? No, didn't think so.

Now I didn't say that I think they handled this well, because they didn't. But people have to stop trying to blame the Lindens for absolutely everything under the sun. Put blame where blame is due.

This has nothing to do with sob stories, but it has a lot to do with raising prices of sims that ARE being used as the pages state, open water for sailing, scenery etc.
An across the board price rise is WRONG when 90% ( a guess ) of people are using the sims as they were intended.

I have three open space sims and a full sim. I didn't get into them to start a buisness of real estate, it actually happened by accident. Because I couldn't afford my full sim, I started renting it out as well as some of my other land.
Now you want to raise the price, and if I lose my renters then I have to close it all. I can't afford it, not with the econmy the way it is.
You've given us little notice, and like everyone else says, it sounds like a punishment.
I don't know what i"m going to do.. You want to charge us almost double, for a quarter of the prims for a full sim. I hope this doesn't happen, I hope there is some resolution.. But if there isn't, everything I've done is lost.

I have tried hard to work out what is the best course of action, the groups i have joined and this forum seem to degenerate into blame and insults, i will not dump any of my sims and try to survive alone, for me the last straw was when i was accused of being a linden, let me just say none of you will amount to anything while you allow all chat to degenerate into a school yard brawl, i have left all the groups and will remove this link from my browser, i will not offer any more to this discussion and will not see any reply s to this, i will do what is best for needles and that is to try to fit into the new business model laid out for us by linden labs.

goodbye

Lucinda Bulloch
Needles CEO

It seems that LL divide and conquer tactic is paying off.

The initial blog post purports to alter the contractual terms that exist between the company and its customers. In that sense it is a legal instrument. If the company attempts to proffer the altered text in any court or administrative proceeding the company, and the representative who makes the proffer, would be guilty of perjury. Uner the terms of the TIS the company can alter the contractual terms unilaterally. No court on this plant would hold that a company can alter a contractual term by stealth.

Any lawyer who advised this course of action would almost certainly be committing a grave breach of ethics. It is impossible to imagine that any lawyer would so advise. It is impossible to imagine that anyone with half a brain would consider altering a contractual instrument to try and cast themselves in a favourable light when the alteration is visible to all and may give rise to serious liability at law.

They are not used against the TOS. All they say is that they won't support someone who is overusing an openspace. Light use is how they should be used, open waterways are an example but hey open waterways can be overused too.

Again it has to be pointed out that Linden Lab continued to sell this product to people knowing damn well how they were being used, so they were doing exactly what you are accusing the estate agents of doing.

Basically

LL sold a product advertised has having 1/4 resources of a full sim. LL provided an *advisory* what might and might not work well on such sims with a warning any poor perfofmance if you heavily used such sims is by design.

If the product provided by LL had actually been the one advertised (i.e. one limited to 1/4 resources of a full sim) there would be no problem.

However, it appears that people have been able to use up to 1/2 the resources of a full sim whilst paying for only 1/4.

Clearly the answer is to make sure that people can only use what they pay for. Few would coherently argue against that.

The solution that many have proposed here and on the jira, is that the available resources for an open sim should be limited to 1/4 of the resources i.e. the resources paid for. However, at present the SL does not include any means of restricting what resources an opensim can use nor provide means for the end user to monitor them. You will find various jiras proposing solutions to these. This seems the obvious solution which would have upset the fewest people - whilst this might have cause performance problems for some (and inevitable complaints), customers would continue to get the product they paid for at the price they agreed to pay. Those for whom the product wasn't suitable could cut back their usage or upgrade to full sims. Refinement of the technology controlling resource usage would have enabled LL to sell a whole range of new products allowing sims to be provided at different price points according to the level of use (and resources available) as has been suggested here by others.

However, such an approach would involve some time and effort on LL's part to develope. So they adopted the other approach to getting usage and cost in sync which involves little effort on LL's part, namely increase the price to match the leve of resources actually being used. The problem here is that, in effect, LL is getting the customer to pay for a product which is different and more expensive to the product the customer originally paid. Unsurprisingly this is not popular with the customer. Moreover, it is only short term - without the technology to limit the resource usage of opensims, it will only be a matter of time before the resources being used once more exceed the price being paid, and LL will once again have to consider implementing resource management technology or up the price again.

It seems almost unsurprising, therefore, that LL would go for the quick and dirty solution which causes more problems in the longer term, than going for a solution which would take them some time and effort to implement but which would actually generate additional benefits longer term.

Matthew

Sorry to say the blame is entirely on Linden. You've neglected to remember that it was only a handful of months ago that Linden heavily promoted the sale of these sims by doubling the prim allotment, lowering the prices, selling them as singles without any restriction on the number purchased, and crowing about grid growth until the bait and switch money grab.

If the technical smoke screen was actually true and Linden made a huge gaffe in not understanding the adverse network implications and issues with shared resources, they should do the right thing by refunding those who purchased these sims, remove the openspaces from the grid, and return to the previous system of void sims which were heavily restricted in both prim allotments, and most important, restricted availability on a ratio of full sim purchaess.

Just raising the price on a defective product simply adds insult to injury and of course this really isn't about technical issues. It's about making up for revenue deficits in other product lines such as premium memberships. They're counting on people to swallow the Kool-Aid but considering the economic times, the absurd 67% price hike (technically justified or not) will likely backfire and other shoes are going to have to drop. $400 fees for full sims, $19.95 for premium, and increased fees for uploading is probably just around the corner. Merry Xmas and Happy New Year.

HI Jack and team,

Just read the new hpdate for the OS SIM use. It is good to know you are listening to us.
I have one suggestion.

1. Create a middle use sim just for residential with 3750 prims and let the owners monitor activity. Its price can be around 125$

2. OS can be used for Forests or Oceans and can be attached to the middle use sim, but reduce the price back to 75$.

3. Full prim sim is where anyone can do anything, so it does not comes under the purvey of this discussion.

Thanks,
Jensen

3,476 posts. 1 from Jack. This is not a discussion.

What is happening now, is the outrage is dieing off. People are suggesting alternatives, and LL wins. This was the most effective strategy that they could have hoped for. Now, instead of maintaining a hostile atmosphere, it seems that people are now seeing the LL side of the story, suggesting means for them to save face, and yet still push through a price hike on people that unfortunately, unsuspectingly, paid out $250 or more for sims that were based on what you can only call a $75 promise, that, thats what you'll pay for them. So, congrats LL. It seems you won over the populous by opening a 'fake' discussion thread, and now win at the bank as well.

Disgusting.

what is the point of this thread really when LL is once again pulling their famous Silent Hill trick?

Here is the thing about the "used right" or "used wrong"

If you have a sim with abolutly nothing on it but water... but then it becomes a popular boat racing spot that almost always has 20 - 30 people there... guess what.. its abused... so really the problem is NOT that they are being abused its that the sims are being used and not just standing empty. the sims cant handle that many people with out taking more processor then intended by LL. Thats LL fault and forcing people paying more money for the same service does not solve any so called backend issues or problem. it just penalizes people for using what they pay for and robs people of what they have purchased by making the maintenance cost more then the items worth.

Its what they always do they have become Masters at it and at the moment people don't want to leave SL as other grids are a bit behind at the moment but they will catch up with the new cash influx they are getting and sooner methinks rather than later.

But baseline LL does not care about the customers, just its profits but thats just my opinion and maybe one or two others